Loading...
1993/05/18City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAy 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Anaheim met in regular session. PRESENT: ABSENT: PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus CITY MANAGER: James Ruth CITY ATTORNEY: Jack White CITY CLERK: Leonora N. Sohl ASSISTANT CITY CLERK: Ann M. Sauvageau DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Gary Johnson TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGER: John Lower INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS OFFICER: Kristine Thalman DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER: Russ McGuire ASSISTANT PURCHASING AGENT: Carole Ibarra DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE: John Roche ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Annika Santalahti A complete copy of the agenda for the meeting of the Anaheim City Council was posted at 1:40 p.m. on May 14, 1993 at the Civic Center kiosk, containing all items as shown herein. Mayor Daly called the workshop portion of the meeting of May 18, 1993 to order at 3:12 p.m. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. City Manager James Ruth. There will be a presentation by John Lower, the City's Traffic and Transportation Manager regarding the transportation impact and improvement fee ordinance for new development which is before the Council for a decision at the 5:00 p.m. portion of the meeting. OOO: TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FEE ORDINANCE: John Lower, Traffic and Transportation Manager. The Council has previously received a staff report dated May 18, 1993 which indicates that as a requirement of Measure M approved by the Orange County Voters in November, 1990, it is necessary that a development mitigation program be adopted by each local agency to ensure that new growth is paying its share of the cost associated with that growth. Measure M eligibility is tied to the City's adoption of the fee program. What is at issue is tens of millions of dollars which the City is receiving through the Measure M local turn back for which the City is competing through the various Measure M programs. Mr. Lower thereupon gave a slide presentation and briefed and elaborated on the figures presented. (Also see staff report of May 18, 1993 from the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, Gary Johnson which discussed the proposed ordinance in detail attached to which were tables - Table 1 showing the possible traffic fee schedules, Table 2, transportation improvement fee comparisons, Table 2, po~s£ble ~ee coll~et£on/oth~ r~v~nu~ total, ~te. Som~ of the tables were part of the slide presentation.) By June 30, 1993, all Orange County cities must have a city-wide fee program in place to maintain Measure M eligibility. In concluding, Mr. Lower stated he has an Anaheim Chamber of Commerce newsletter, wherein it states that the Chamber at every level would support the concept of a fee program because of its concern for retaining eligibility for Measure M funds. At the conclusion of Mr. Lower's presentation, Council Members posed questions which were answered by Mr. Lower relative to the possible fees with reductions of the recommended 25%, 50% and 60% (see page two of the subject report). Further, the ordinance needs to be adopted by June 30th of this year, there is a stipulation that a minimum fee be approved by each growth management area, 328 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5500 P.M. what projects would and would not be subject to the fee, etc. Existing developments would be exempt. Extensive discussion followed between Council Members relative to many aspects of the proposal especially with regard to the fees that might be set in Anaheim in comparison to other cities. Mayor Daly stated his concern is that they respect the condition of the market place right now and that they not lose any marketing edge they have with surrounding cities. Council Member Pickler. This item is scheduled to be acted upon this evening. He has asked the Public Works Director Mr. Johnson if there was some way to hold off, he would like to do more in depth discussion with staff and the matter brought back on June 8th if possible. He will be asking for that action when the matter is discussed this evening. City Attorney White confirmed for the Council that the ordinance has to be adopted by June 30, 1993, not effective. By law there is a 60-day waiting period in this case whereas it is usually only 30 days. Council Member Hunter. He agrees with Council Member Pickler. He would like to know what other cities are doing. If other cities know what Anaheim is doing regarding fees, those cities will have an opportunity to do something else which could put Anaheim at a disadvantage. After further discussion, Mayor Daly thanked Mr. Lower and Johnson for the informative presentation. City Manager Ruth. Kris Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer is present to give her periodic legislative update. 139: LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: Kris Thalman, Intergovernmental Relations Officer. She submitted a presentation outline entitled, Legislative Update (made a part of the record). Relative to State Legislation, virtually all legislation is dependent on the State budget. The assembly speaker maintains the budget will be adopted by June 15, 1993, but no one believes that will be so. Everyone is waiting to see what the Governor's revised budget may reveal. Mrs. Thalman briefed and/or elaborated upon all of the categories listed under State Legislation dealing with the State budget, specific legislation status update and the meeting with Senator Hurtt regarding the State budget impact. Relative to Federal Legislation, Mrs. Thalman reported on the economic stimulus package~ tax legislation and gang/drug abatement/education/ intervention/prevention grants. This afternoon, she received an urgent alert regarding the possible federal energy tax. The Public Utilities Department has done an analysis on how the City would be impacted. The energy tax is the major concern of all taxes and increases proposed. The BTU (British Thermal Units) is probably the most equitable if a tax can be equitable. The City's major concern is a carbon tax which would have a significant impact on Utilities. During and after Mrs. Thalman's presentation, Council Members posed questions on certain aspects of either State or Federal Legislation. Mayor Daly thanked Mrs. Thalman for her presentation. RECESS - CLOSED SESSION: City Attorney Jack White requested a Closed Session to consider the following items: 329 City Ha11~ ~,mheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. a. To confer with its Attorney regarding pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to wit: Peggy Long vs. City of Anaheim, Orange County Superior Court Case 61-16-95. be To meet with and give directions to its authorized representative regarding labor relations matters - Government Code Section 54957.6. c. To consider and take possible action upon personnel matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957. To confer with its attorney regarding potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (b)(1). ee To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as are orally announced by the City Attorney, City Manager or City Council prior to such recess unless the motion to recess indicates any of the matters will not be considered in closed session. RECESS: Council Member Simpson moved to recess into Closed Session. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED. (4:05 p.m.) AFTER RECESS: The Mayor called the meeting to order, all Council Members being present, and welcomed those in attendance to the Council meeting. (5:23 p.m.). INVOCATION: Reverend Jim Schibsted, First Congregational Church, gave the invocation. FLAG SALUTE: Council Member Fred Hunter led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 119: PROCLAMATION: The following proclamation was issued by Mayor Daly and authorized by the City Council: National Public Works Week in Anaheim, May 16 - 22, 1993 Mr. Gary Johnson, Public Works/City Engineer Director and John Roche, Maintenance Director accepted the proclamation. 119: DECLARATION OF RECOGNITION: A Declaration of Recognition was unanimously adopted by the City Council and presented to Julie Mayer for her dedicated efforts on behalf of the Anaheim Children's Festival. Mayor Daly and Council Members personall~ congratulated Mrs. Mayer for the time and effort she gave in bringing the Children's Festival to the City of Anaheim which was a great success. The following were recognitions authorized by the City Council this date to be mailed or presented at another time: Proclamation - Management Week in Anaheim, June 5-12, 1993 330 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Declaration - Barry Manilow's contribution to the opening of the Anaheim Arena FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY in the amount of $6,565,008.44 for the period ending May 14, 1993, in accordance with the 1992-93 Budget, were approved. Mayor Daly recessed the City Council meeting until after the Redevelopment Agency, Housing Authority and Public Improvement Corporation meetings. (5:35 p.m.) Mayor Daly reconvened the City Council meeting. (5:38 p.m.) ITEMS OF PUBLIC INTEREST: Fern Wilson. Her group is here today to voice their disappointment and disapproval of the May 12, 1993 action making Claudina Street one way in order to make 14 parking spaces for the two restaurants in the commercial center (Anaheim Boulevard and Center Street). She spoke to Alfred Yalda of the Engineering Department the day the change was being made. He indicated that southbound privileges were being taken away. He also stated that the residents had been notified. She emphasized that they had not been notified and had no idea such an action had been planned. There were no parking problems before the restaurants came in. If proper research had been done, it would have been evident that there was not enough parking for two restaurants. The area residents are mainly senior citizens. She explained the hardships that will be caused by the change involving inaccessibility by TLC buses, Dial-A-Ride, Meals-On-Wheels, Feedback Foundation, trash hauling vehicles, emergency vehicles, United Parcel, commercial movers as well as a great inconvenience to the Senior Center. She briefed the circulation patterns that were possible before the change and the impossible circulation patterns the change has caused. The multi-storage parking garage should be adequate for restaurant parking overflow. They have endured late night closing noise, dumpster noises and parking in the middle of the street by delivery trucks. Claudina has been two-way for over 50 years. She questioned why it must be changed to benefit so few. She urged the Council to have the street changed back to a two-way street. George McClaren, referred to his letter sent after he saw the restriping that was taking place on Claudina on May 12, 1993. (Letter previously received and made a part of the record.) The letter outlined the specific concerns, most of which had been addressed by Mrs. Wilson. Since closing Claudina southbound, seniors attending the different events at the Senior Center on the seven days it is ~pened have had to search for other exits besides Lincoln. In July when the Trident Senior Center closes, the City will be bringing all its square dancing classes to the downtown center. At night, it is going to be difficult for those people to get out of the center. When the City improved Center Street, they closed off Philadelphia so that there is no access from Lincoln down Philadelphia to Center street. Since he does not believe the Council will change its mind regarding Claudina Street, he suggests that they reopen Philadelphia Street at Center Street to loosen the stranglehold that has been created. He urged that the Council take appropriate action. The seniors were not aware this change was going to take place. (Later in the meeting, Mr. McClaren submitted a letter attached to which was a petition signed by approximately 123 people in opposition to the change and requesting that Claudina again be a two-way thoroughfare.) Mayor Daly. He asked that a report be submitted by Lisa Stipkovich, Executive Director of Community Development regarding the change that has already occurred, the rationale, and how it is working. The intention was to create City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. additional parking for the commercial uses in downtown and for easier pedestrian access across Claudina. He would also like a study on the pros and cons of opening Philadelphia Street through to Center Street. Bill Ericson, 301 E. North Street. As a member of the senior citizens and the Senior Citizen Commission, he would like to relate his concerns regarding the proposed downtown community center. In his presentation, he broached the subject of financing the Center and how that might be accomplished. He concluded by stating that he hopes the community center is a priority. He noted that the Mayor had indicated that they were looking for other avenues of refinancing. He asked if there are any others beyond the ones he proposed. City Manager Ruth. One of the hopes was that with the Jobs Bill there might be some economic development money made available, but it looks as though that is in serious jeopardy. Other sources could be CDBG but he understands those funds are being cut back next year as well. They will just have to wait and see; Mayor Daly noted that Redevelopment funds will also be cut back this year by the State. City Manager Ruth. This will be the second year in a row for those funds to be cut. They lost 3.2 million last year and it is conceivable they will lose as much as 5 million in Redevelopment money this year. Rene Serrano, 1335 S. Petal Place. (Also see minutes of April 6 and May 4, 1993, where Mr. Serrano brought his request for stop signs and other traffic striping before the Council.) He was before the Council previously asking for two additional stop signs in a four-way intersection. He has a video tape he would like to present this evening and has equipment with him for viewing. It was determined that Mr. Serrano would contact the City Clerk's Office to make arrangements for the video to be shown under Items of Public Interest at the Council meeting of May 25, 1993. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AGENDA ITEMS: Public input received on Item Al3 (see discussion under that item). MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions to be acted upon for the Council meeting of May 18, 1993. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED. CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENTAL CONSENT CALENDAR: On motion by Council Member Pickler, seconded by Council Member Hunter, the following items were approved in accordance with the reports, certifications and recommendations furnished each Council Member and as listed on the Consent Calendar; Council Member Pickler offered Resolution Nos. 93R-79 through 93R-81, both inclusive, for adoption. Refer to Resolution Book. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. Al. 118: The following claims were filed against the City and action taken as recommended: 332 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Claims rejected and referred to Risk Management: a. Claim submitted by A.H. Equipment Corporation, Advanced Spa Designs- attn: Cheryl Gleeson for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about January 28, 1993. b .Claim submitted by Terri B. Green for property damage sustained purportedly due to actions of the City on or about March 9, 1993. A2. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Community Redevelopment Commission meeting held April 14, 1993. 105: Receiving and filing minutes of the Mother Colony House Advisory Board meeting held March 8, 1993. A3. 164: Awarding the contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Nobest, in the amount of $29,016.65 for Barrier Free Anaheim 1992-93; and in the event said low bidder fails to comply with the terms of the award, awarding the contract to the second low bidder, as well as waiving any irregularities in the bids of both the low and second low bidders. A4. 169: Approving'a Notice of Completion of the Construction of Imperial Highway/Santa Aha Canyon Road Street and Traffic Signal Improvements by R.J. Noble Company; and authorizing the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to file said Notice of Completion. AS. 158: Authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute quitclaim deeds for the City's interest in a storm drain easement lying within the south five feet of Lot 82 and the north five feet of Lot 83 in Tract No. 2653 (Abandonment No. 92-6A). A6. 155: Certifying that the City Council has reviewed and considered the information in FEIR No. 538 for the Katella Avenue Super Street project segments E and F in the City of Anaheim, and segment D, G and a portion of segment C in the cities of Anaheim and/or Stanton, Garden Grove, Orange and unincorporated County of Orange; 155: Making findings for each significant effect and findings relative to the rejection of project alternatives; and 155: Adopting a mitigation monitoring plan and a statement of overriding considerations. A7. 155: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-79: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM MODIFYING FEIR NO. 299 (ANAHEIM ARENA) MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (RESOLUTION NO. 89R-471). A8. 156: Holmes & Narver, Phase 2 through Phase 6 architectural services for the Anaheim Police Department Satellite Substation. (Continued from the meetings of April 20, and May 4, 1993.) Council Member Hunter. He spoke to the City Manager and suggested that the matter again be continued to discuss whether or.not the actual site that is contemplated is the one that the Council wants to go with. Council Member Hunter moved to continue the subject item to Tuesday, June 8, 1993. Council Member Daly seconded the motion. 333 City Hall, Anaheim, Callfornia - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. Before a vote was taken, Mayor Daly asked in the meantime if the City Manager has a proposed process for further evaluation of the other sites. Council Member Simpson. It is clear that a majority of the Council does not favor the site recommended unless there are compelling reasons. If not, he would like a list of the next two or three prime sites in order of preference; Mayor Daly. He would like a staff report on what the alternatives might be in terms of siting the facility. A vote was then taken on the continuance to June 8, 1993. MOTION CARRIED. (Council Member Feldhaus was absent). A9. 160: Accepting the low bid of Virco Manufacturing Corporation, in the amount of $104,700 (plus applicable taxes) for 2500 portable folding chairs and 100 seat and back covers for the Convention Center Arena, in accordance with Bid ~5125. Al0. 184: Authorizing the Purchasing Agent to issue a change order to Bonafide Security Service, in an amount not to exceed $120,000, bringing the revised total to a not to exceed amount of $370,000 for security guard services in the East Anaheim Hills Flood Disaster Area. Ail. 128: Receiving and filing the Monthly Financial Analysis presented by the'Director of Finance for eight months ended February 28, 1993. Al2. 123: Accepting the low bid, and authorizing the execution of an Agreement with Nobest Incorporated, in an amount not to exceed $444,686.66 (including ten percent contingency), for the removal and replacement of residential sidewalks, curbs, gutters and cross gutters, in accordance with Bid #5130. Al3. 123: Accepting the bid, and authorizing the Maintenance Director to execute an Agreement with MacHoward Leasing, in the amount of $109,656.48 (plus applicable taxes) for the leasing of ten 4-Door Sedans, in accordance with Bid #5136. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais. In reviewing the material, the comparison made was that the leasing will cost $168,000 vs. $180,000 for the purchase of the same vehicles. He asked what is the typical salvage value of a purchased vehicle and if this is a real savings or a forestalling of future cost. He would like to know if there are any costs that are a result of this arrangement that would not be evident either in lost salvage value or additional mileage costs or maintenance. Carol Ibarra, Assistant Purchasing Agent. They did a study on buying vs. leasing. She briefed the results of the analysis made which led to the decision to lease rather than purchase concluding that it was more economical than purchasing. John Roche, Maintenance Director. This is the first time the City has entered into this type of program. The cars that are to be replaced are in the Police Department - detective cars. They believe with the turnover every four years instead of eight years, cars will have less miles and a maintenance cost will be cheaper. It is something they would like to try to see how it works. It is a lease that anyone can get with the only exception being they went to 20,000 instead of the normal 15,000 miles. It is a straight lease and maintenance is still performed by the maintenance program. He reiterated it 334 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. is a program that they would like to try limiting it to the Police Department at this time. Al4. 123: Approving the execution of an Agreement with the Anaheim Union High School District to facilitate Summer Sports Camps for the period of June 1, 1993 through September 30, 1993. Al5. 137: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-80: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM (I) APPROVING THE FIRST SUPPLEMENT;iL TRUST AGREEMENT (COMBUSTION TURBINE); (II) APPROVING THE FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL TRUST AGREEMENT (UTILITIES BUILDING/CITY HALL WEST), AND (III) AUTHORIZING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. Al6. 101: RESOLUTION NO. 93R-81: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING A CITY POLICY CONCERNING WAIVER OF PARKING FEES AT ANAHEIM STADIUM AND THE ANAHEIM CONVENTION CENTER. 114: Adopting Council Policy 013 concerning waiver of parking fees at Anaheim Stadium and Anaheim Convention Center. A17. 177: Approving submittal by the Community Development Department of an application for 1993 Supportive Housing Program funds, in the amount of $400,000, and authorizing the Mayor and the Executive Director to sign the necessary documents and certifications for submission of the application for federal assistance to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Al8. 184: Reviewing the need for continuing the Proclamation of the Existence of a local emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on January 19, 1993, and ratified by the City Council on January 26, 1993, concerning the Santiago Landslide and Pegasus Landslide in the City of Anaheim; and taking no action to terminate the local emergency at this time. Roll Call Vote on Resolution Nos. 93R-79 throuqh 93R-81, both inclusive, for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly None Feldhaus The Mayor declared Resolution Nos. 93R-79 through 93R-81, both inclusive, duly passed and adopted._ END OF CONSENT CALENDAR. MOTIONS CARRIED. Al9. 108/000: 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - BUSINESS LICENSES AND FEES: To consider an ordinance repealing Title 3 of the Anaheim Municipal Code and adding new Title 3 pertaining to Business License and fees; and a resolution adopting certain fees in connection with the Business License Tax Ordinance and Superseding Resolution No. 92R-134. Ordinance No. 5368 - repealing Title 3 was introduced at the meeting of May ll, 1993. Mayor Daly. Last week the Council heard the staff presentation on the proposed changes to the business license schedule. He noted that the public hearing is still open and asked to hear from anyone who wished to speak. 335 City Hall, Anaheim~ California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. Mrs. Hernandez, 2810 W. Ball Road, hairdresser. Since the business license was changed, it has been a hardship on her and other like businesses. An increase to $150 was extremely high. They work very hard at their trade. She urged the Council to approve the proposed change which will be a decrease in business license fees for their businesses. Jeff Kirsch, 2661 W. Palais, Anaheim. He referred to a newspaper article which reported that Garden Grove in an effort to stimulate economic activity has considered temporarily waiving its business license fee to encourage establishment of businesses. Since Anaheim offers economic incentives, this might be something to look at. There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Daly closed the public hearing. Council Member Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5368 for adoption. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 5368 - ADOPTION: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM REPEALING TITLE 3 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING NEW TITLE 3 PERTAINING TO 'USINESS LICENSE AND FEES ASSOCIATED THEREWITH. (Introduced at the meeting of ~y 11, 1993.) ~oll Call Vote on Ordinance No. 5368 for adoption: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly COUNCIL MEMBERS: None COUNCIL MEMBERS: Feldhaus The Mayor declared Ordinance No. 5368 duly passed and adopted. Council Member Hunter offered Resolution No. 93R-82 for adoption, adopting certain fees in connection with the Business License Tax Ordinance and Superseding Resolution No. 92R-134. Refer to Resolution Book. RESOLUTION NO. 93R-82: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING CERTAIN FEES IN CONNECTION WITH THE BUSINESS LICENSE TAX ORDINANCE AND SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 92R-134. ~oll Call Vote on Resolution No. 93R-82 for adoption: ~YES: NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Hunter, Pickler, Simpson, Daly None Feldhaus The Mayor declared Resolution No. 93R-82 duly passed and adopted. A20. 000: 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING - TRANSPORTATION IMPACT AND IMPROVEMENT FEES FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT: To consider an ordinance authorizing collection of a Citywide Transportation Impact and Improvement fee from new development as mandated by Measure M; and a resolution selecting a 25% reduction in actual costs of new development transportation impacts as the schedule of fees for the Citywide Transportation Impact and Improvement Program. ORDINANCE NO. INTRODUCTION: Adding Chapter 17.32 to Title 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code establishing a Transportation Impact and Improvement .fee for new development. 336 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. RESOLUTION NO. - .... : Establishing a Transportation Impact and Improvement fee for all developments in the City of Anaheim. Council Member Pickler. There was a Council workshop held on this issue today. At the time, he stated he was going to request that the matter be continued to June 8, 1993 in order to evaluate not only what staff has presented but also to give an opportunity to come back at that time with suggestions. Council Member Pickler moved to continue consideration of the subject fees to Tuesday, June 8, 1993. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Mayor Daly asked the City Attorney if this is a public hearing. City Attorney White. The State statute uses the term public meeting. It does require notice to go out to invite members of the public to come and voice their opinions. There has been a legal notice published on this matter. It would be in order if not tonight certainly at the meeting before the Council acts to receive public comments. There may be people who wish to comment. If the Council continues the matter, it would be at their discretion to take comments tonight or put it all over and take comments at the continued meeting. Mayor Daly. If there are those who wish to speak on the matter, although the proposal has been put forth to continue it for three weeks, those citizens may do so at this time. Phil Knypstra, 2520 Gelid. He has renamed the tax TIIF. As he understands, this is basically going to be on all building permits for new development by an owner or developer. There are also many exemptions. What concerns him, he is not clear what new development means and would like clarification. He can understand why the City wants the tax because it represents 2.9 million dollars. As he understands it, the tax on a new family residence would be $1384 which will increase the price of housing in Anaheim as well as for apartments, hotel, motels, etc. The justification is that the tax is mandated by Measure M, a one-half cent sales tax. Now because the citizens voted for the tax, they are going to be getting a new tax. It does not make sense to him. If people knew when they voted for Measure M it created the necessity for a new tax, they would be alarmed. Another justification is that if other cities are doing it, Anaheim should also. If the City of Anaheim approves the tax, the other ci~ies will also approve it. Obviously there is too much tax and citizens do not need more. He is not in favor. He does not know all the details and would like clarification. Mayor Daly. At the workshop held this afternoon on the subject, many of the points raised by Mr. Knypstra were raised by Council Members and staff indicated they will return to the Council with additional information. He ~eels Mr. Knypstra summarized many o~ the reasons why the item £s propo~d to be continued for three weeks. Council Member Pickler. The developers who developed the new buildings are the ones that pushed for Measure M and did realize this was a part of Measure M as well as the majority of the people.who voted for it. All cities have to adopt a fee program to be eligible for Measure M funds. The Council does not have to go along with the figures proposed and at the workshop talked about being able to recommend any other amounts. 337' City Ha11~ Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5=00 P.M. A vote was then taken on the motion for continuance, Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED. A21. 105: RESIGNATION FROM COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD: Donald W. Dexter (term expires June 30, 1993). MOTION: Council Member Daly moved to accept the resignation of Mr. Dexter from the Community Services Board. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED. Council Member Hunter asked that appropriate recognition for Mr. Dexter be scheduled for a Council agenda. SWEAR-IN OF THOSE TESTIFYING AT PUBLIC HEARINGS: The City Attorney announced that it is appropriate at this time for all those intending to testify at any or all of the public hearings including staff be sworn in at this time. Those testifying were requested to stand by the City Clerk and asked to raise their right hand. The oath was then given. D1 179: CONTINUED.PUBLIC HEARING - WAIVER OF CODE REQUIREMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3581 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Hutton Development Company, 201 E. Sandpointe, Ste. 300, Santa Aha, CA 92707-8707 AGENT: Reeves Assoc. Architects, Inc., Attn: Lawrence C. Reeves, 417 South Hill Street, Ste. 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90013 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 8205 E. Santa Aha Canyon Road and is approximately 3.34 acres on the north side of Santa Aha Canyon Road and approximately 1050 feet west of the centerline of Weir Canyon Road. The request is to permit an automotive repair facility including the retail sale and installation of automobile parts and accessories with waivers of (A) minimum setback adjacent to a freeway, (B) permitted freestanding sign, (C) permitted wall signs and (D) permitted roof-mounted equipment. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: CUP NO. 3581 GRANTED (PC93-24) with nine added conditions (6 yes votes, and 1 no vote. Waiver of code requirement APPROVED, IN PART, waivers A, B and D GRANTED, and waiver C DENIED. Approved Ngg&tive Declaration. HEARING SET ON: A review of the Planning Commission's decision was requested by Council Members Daly and Pickler at the meeting of March 16, 1993, and public hearing scheduled April 20, 1993. At that meeting, the applicant requested a continuance to May 18, 1993. Although the continuance was subsequently granted, public input was received since many citizens were present on the issue. On May 11, 1993, Floyd Farano attorney for the medical center requested a continuance instead to June 22, 1993 which was granted by the Council. PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENTS MET BY: Publication in Anaheim Bulletin - April 8, 1993 Mailing to property owners within 300 feet - April 8, 1993 Posting of property - April 9, 1993 PLANNING STAFF INPUT: 338 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. See staff report to the Planning Commission dated February 22, 1993. City Clerk Sohl. The reason the item is on the agenda tonight is due to the fact that it was continued from the meeting of April 20, 1993 to May 18, 1993 however on May 11, 1993 subsequent action was taken by the Council to continue the public hearing instead to June 22, 1993. Mayor Daly asked if the public hearing is then already considered continued. City Attorney White. The Council already took an action last week to continue the public hearing to June 22, 1993. Because the notice had already gone out scheduling it for tonight, technically in order to continue it again from this agenda a formal action should be taken. MOTION: Council Member Daly reaffirmed continuance of the subject public hearing to Tuesday, June 22, 1993. Council Member Hunter seconded the motion. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney White further clarified for the Mayor that there was no legal requirement to take any public comment tonight. It would be at the Council's discretion. The Mayor asked if anyone was present who wished to speak; there was no response. D2. 164: ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LEMON STREET ASSESSMENT AREA AND A DRAINAGE ASSESSMENT AREA FEE OF 97,150 PER ACRE: To consider a resolution for the establishment of the Lemon Street Drainage Assessment Area and adopting a fee of $7,150 per acre. Submitted was report dated May 11, 1993 from Gary Johnson, Director of Public Works and City Engineer recommending that the Council by resolution approve the establishment of the Lemon Street Drainage Assessment Area and adopt a fee of $7,150 per acre. City Clerk Sohl announced that three letters of opposition have been received from Northrop Corporation, Auburndale Properties and Bryan Industrial Properties. Mr. Russ Maguire, Deputy City Engineer briefed the Council on the matter giving an historical overview. The item before the Council started when the City received a ~etter from the developer's representative on September 2, 1992 requesting the formation of a reimbursement district per Chapter 17 of the Anaheim Municipal Code for oversizing of the storm drain to service properties other than the development proposed. The City concurred with the submittal. It is a reimbursement district dealing only with payment of fees upon future development. It only applies when property within the district is developed. At that time, the developer would pay the fee and the City would reimburse the applicant for the funds already expended for the drain. This proposed reimbursement district abuts a previously approved drainage district immediately south and east which was approved in July, 1989. The area fee for that is $9,230 per acre. They are recommending approval of the requested reimbursement district as set forth in the resolution at a fee of $7,150 per acre. Council Members Pickler and Hunter posed questions relative to the formula used in assessing the fees which were answered in detail by the City Attorney. He also explained that it goes back to 1974 or 1975 when the master plan of 33g City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. drainage was adopted throughout the City. In this case the developer has come in making a demand for an increased size of storm drain and therefore has been required to put in a storm drain that is not only adequate for his needs but also the needs of other properties that may in the future be developed in the area. The first developer will then be entitled by law to reimbursement from the other properties to the extent that they benefit. If properties are never further developed, they are not going to have to pay the fee; the fee is only paid on new development. Mayor Daly opened the public hearing. Mr. Jerry Knudsen, 2540 Huntington Drive. He is appearing on behalf of R.S. Mike Holt, Brian Industrial Properties and Lemon Associates who own over 30 acres in the subject assessment area and have filed a protest to the proposed assessment (see letter dated May 5, 1993 from Mr. Holt listing eleven reasons why they oppose and protest the formation of the proposed Lemon Street Assessment area and proposed assessment of $7,150 per acre). He briefed and elaborated upon the reasons as outlined emphasizing that the drain benefits only the drive-in theatre property and that they find no legal basis for the assessment. He added that the drain extends into the City of Fullerton and its cost, if prorated, is considerably greater than the $200,000 estimate. The drive-in theatres gave the total cost as being in excess of $955,000 which means that the Fullerton portion is more than $560,000. It is unusual that the proposed assessment by the City of Anaheim is for the entire drain when 59% of the land in which the drain is placed is owned by the City of Fullerton. They respectfully request that the proposed resolution be denied. Mr. Ron Schultz, Team 5 Civil Engineers. (Mr. Schultz was first sworn in by the City Clerk since he was not present earlier.) They are the civil engineers involved in the project and are for the district being formed. He is present to answer any questions and is speaking on behalf of Pacific Drive-In Theatres. They filed a request for the district being formed for their client and pursuant to the Anaheim Municipal Code. COUNCIL ACTION: There being no further persons who wished to speak, Mayor Daly closed the public hearing. Council Member Pickler asked the City Attorney to address some of Mr. Knudsen's statements. City Attorney White. Addressing the legal issues, the proceeding is not a classic assessment district proceeding in which a majority of the property owner's protest would require the City Council to either overrule the protest by a two-thirds vote or abandon the formation of a district. It is not an assessment district as the term is legally used but a benefit district. In a benefit district, only those properties that are subsequently developed and benefit from the improvement are required to make a payment. The fact that there may be a majority protest does not mean the same as would be the case in an assessment district - that the City Council overrule or abandon the district. Gary Johnson. Answering Council Member Pickler he explained if the drainage study indicated the need for the master plan storm drain, any other property owner would have had the same ability to petition the City Council to establish a reimbursement district to recover the cost in excess of the 340 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MI~ES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5500 P.M. prorata share. The City is merely the conduit and not the beneficiary of any funds received. Mayor Daly. He wants to make clear to Mr. Knudsen that the proposal will only cause a fee to be paid if a new development is proposed on their property. Jerry Knudsen. He understands that argument. This is over a $200,000 potential assessment coming off the top of any sale of the property. It is impacting the property very substantially. It is misleading for administrative staff to say that it is not. Every property in the area is fully developed except for Pacific Drive-In Theatres. Thirty (30) acres times $7,150 is quite a hit. He clarified that the Brian properties are fully developed but there are circumstances which can cause the assessment to be paid - if there is a fire or they put in something different. Mr. Johnson clarified if there was a fire and the replacement was in kind, there would be no assessment; City Attorney White confirmed for Council Member Hunter that if the properties as currently developed were leveled and apartments or commercial were built, that development would then be subject to the assessment. Further discussion and questioning followed with questions answered by both the Public Works Director and City Attorney. Mr. Johnson confirmed that the storm drain was installed solely based on the Pacific Drive-In project. The master plan indicated there was an area-wide problem. The drain is necessary to provide flood protection for the entire area - over 130 acres. The drain is installed and they have a complete report from the Engineer. They concur with the cost of almost $956,000 and the allocation of the cost. They have a request from the developer to form a reimbursement drainage district and that is the petition before the Council this evening. City Attorney White. This is not a unique circumstance but the same procedure followed in forming every drainage district and reimbursement area. The reason they do not and cannot hold a hearing and impose the fees before the improvements are installed, they do not have any idea of the ultimate cost and how it is going to be split. If they were not to create the district, a real question would exist because they have now required the owner of one parcel to install an improvement in excess of what is necessary to meet his drainage requirement that he could seek relief from the City for the extra cost he had to spend which did not benefit his property. If the district does not form, the City would have some exposure to the property owner. council Me~ber Hunter then posed a line of questions relative to the benefit to the City of Fullerton of the storm drain answered by both Mr. Maguire and Johnson. Mr. Maguire reported that there is some level of potential benefit to Fullerton but by law they have to proportion the cost of the drain over the whole drainage area so that everybody only pays their fair share. If property is outside of the City's jurisdiction, it is incumbent upon the developer to get the City of Fullerton to also form a reimbursement district; Gary Johnson. If the developer does not petition the City of Fullerton for the per acre cost in Fullerton, the developer will not receive reimbursement for that acreage. Upon further questioning by Council Member Hunter, City Attorney White explained the reason and theory for requiring the oversize drain giving an example in his explanation. He also clarified .for Council Member Pickler that the statute does not technically require notice to personally go to all the properties. The City met the requirement in the law by imposing new fees requiring that it be published in the newspaper which was done on three 34~' City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. different occasions one week apart. He also confirmed that it is a contingent liability and the contingency is on development in the future. Mayor Daly. He would like to know some of the historical background on how Anaheim forms these districts, collects the fees, experiences in other districts, etc. He wants to make sure it is the fairest and best way and is keeping with the tradition of handling drainage matters in Anaheim. He also wants to know what assurance the City has that Fullerton will follow suit. He believes they need a fuller summary by staff. He, therefore, suggested a 30-day continuance of the matter. Council Member Hunter. He would like to know hypothetically, if Pacific Drive-In when it was first developed, whoever developed it and did the grading did not do a good job and that caused the drainage problem further causing the request for an oversize drain. He does not know if that is true. He wants to know the history going back to the beginning. If it is true, then the opponents have a legitimate argument. He will not vote on the issue until he gets more information. MOTION: Council Member Hunter moved that the matter be continued for 30-days to Tuesday, June 29, 1993 and that the requested information by Council be provided by staff. Council Member Simpson seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Council Member Simpson stated he would like to know what happens absent a district as well as the other implications by other Council Members. Does the City have to pay for the drain. Council Member Pickler. He suggested that staff along with the City Attorney give the answers to all the questions asked and other things they would need answers to that they have not asked. A vote was then taken on the foregoing motion. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED (Council Member Pickler commented that he will not be present at the Council Meeting that date.) Mr. Knudsen requested that any staff report generated be a public record so that they could see it before the next hearing. City Attorney White. The portion that answers the questions that were asked would be a public record prior to the meeting and available by the Friday prior to the Tuesday Council meeting at approximately 12:00 noon. ITEMS BI - B6 FROM THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING OF APRIL 29, 1993: DECISION DATEs MAY 6, 1993 INFORMATION ONLY - APPEAL PERIOD ENDS MAY 21, 1993 B1. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3598 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Bradmore Realty Investment Co. Ltd., 721 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Monica Boulevard, CA 90401 AGENT: Calvary Chapel Anaheim, 270 East Palais Road, Anaheim, CA 92805 LOCATION: 270 East Palais Road. Property is consisting of approximately 4.69 acres, with frontage of approximately 80 feet on the south side of Palais Road with maximum depth of 555 feet and being located approximately 710 feet east of the centerline of Anaheim Boulevard. To permit a pre-school and elementary school in conjunction with an existing 20,000 square foot church facility with waivers of minimum number of parking spaces and permitted outdoor uses. 342' City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: CUP NO. 3598, Revision No. 1 of Exhibit No. 1 APPROVED regarding fencing around play area (Decision No. ZA93-30). Approved Negative Declaration. Council Member Pickler posed questions to staff regarding parking which were answered by the Zoning Administrator Annika Santalahti. She also clarified for the Mayor that the CUP does not impose a time limit but there is a maximum enrollment limit. If it works out to be successful, they would have to come back and get a new CUP or whatever to increase the enrollment. B2. 179~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3609 AND NEGATIVE DECLABATION: OWNER: Anaheim Redevelopment, 201 S. Anaheim Boulevard, Anaheim, CA 92803 AGENT: Watt Management, 2716 Ocean Park Boulevard, Santa Monica, CA 90405 LOCATION: 188 West Lincoln Avenue. Property is approximately 10.8 acres, located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Anaheim Boulevard, with frontage of approximately of 540 feet on the west side of Anaheim Boulevard and 334 feet on the east side of Clementine Street and 315 feet on the north side of Oak Street. To permit on-premise sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages in an enclosed restaurant, with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: CUP NO. 3609 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA93-31). Approved Negative Declaration. B3. 179~ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3600 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: OWNER: Imperial Properties, 3188 Pullman, Costa Mesa, CA 92626 AGENT: Yves Masquefa, 4455 Feather River Road, Corona, CA 91720 LOCATION: 5753-A East Santa Aha Canyon (Yves Bistro). Property is approximately 4.2 acres, located at the northeast corner of Santa Aha Canyon Road and Imperial Highway. To permit the expansion of a gourmet restaurant with outdoor seating and on-premise sale and consumption of beer and wine and with waiver of minimum number of parking spaces. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: CUP NO. 3600 APPROVED Added conditions, including outdoor area shall not be open for people to be able to walk through (Decision No. ZA93-32). Approved Negative Declaration. B4. 179: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 3601 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION: B5. OWNER: Scott Burnham, 770 The City Drive #215, Orange, CA 92668 AGENT: Alex Perez, 23822 Palmek Circle, Lake Forest, CA 92630 LOCATION: 407-476 South Anaheim Hills Road. Property is approximately 7.0 acres located at the Northeast corner of Anaheim Hills Road and Nohl Road. To permit on-premise sale and consumption of beer and wine in a 2,400 square-foot restaurant with an outdoor seating area. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: CUP NO. 3601 APPROVED, IN PART, denying the outdoor seating area (Decision No. ZA93-33). Approved Negative Declaration. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4224, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5: 343 City Hall, Anaheim, California - COUNCIL MINUTES - MAY 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. OWNER: Suresh Jhawar, 8085 East Sandstone Drive, Anaheim, CA 92808 AGENT: Frank Ghalili, 5728 Rocking Horse Way, Orange, CA 92669 LOCATION: 5180 East Copa De Oro. Property is approximately 1.0 acre with frontage of approximately 198 feet on the north side of Nohl Ranch Road, maximum depth of approximately 210 feet and 450 feet west of the centerline of Rolling Hills Place. Waiver of minimum rear yard setback, and orientation of dwelling adjacent to an arterial highway. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Variance No. 4224 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA93-34). B6. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4225, CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT, CLASS 5: OWNER: Leslie & Chilio Doi, 2839 Puente Street, Fullerton, CA 92635 LOCATION: 569 East Peralta Hills Drive. Property is approximately 1.07 acres, with frontage of approximately 140 feet on the east side of a private road, extending south of Cerro Vista Drive having a maximum depth of approximately 332 feet, and being located approximately 430 feet south of the centerline of Peralta Hills Drive. Waiver of required setback to construct a 1,542 square-foot addition to an existing 4,110 square-foot single-family residence. ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: variance No. 4225 APPROVED (Decision No. ZA92-35). END OF TEE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ITEMS. B7. 179: ORDINANCE NO. 5370 - INTRODUCTION: Amending Section 18.05.091 of Chapter 18.05 of Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code Relating to business signs permitted in the CL-HS Zone. (Continued from the meeting of April 27, 1993.) Council Member Hunter offered Ordinance No. 5370 for first reading. Refer to Ordinance Book. ORDINANCE NO. 5370: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM AMENDING SECTION 18.05.091 OF CHAPTER 18.05 OF TITLE 18 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO BUSINESS SIGNS PERMITTED IN THE CL-HS ZONE. B8. 179: VARIANCE NO. 4126 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 91-173 EXTENSION OF TIME: Request by Doug Browne, West Street Development Company, Inc., P.O. Box 18021, Anaheim, CA 92817-8021 LOCATION/REQUEST: The property is located at 901 North West Street, on the west side of West Street approximately 760 feet north of the centerline of North Street. The petitioner requests an time extension retroactive to June 4, 1992 to expire June 4, 1994 for Variance No. 4126 to comply with conditions of approval. Variance No. 4126 is for a waiver of required lot frontage, minimum lot area and minimum lot width to permit a 3-lot, RS-10,O00 residential, single family zoned subdivision. This matter was continued from the meeting of May 4, 1993 to this date in order to obtain input from the developer, Doug Browne. Doug Browne, 151 S. Quintana, Anaheim. When he originally obtained approval on the parcel map associated with the variance, he planned to build larger 344 City Hall, Anahe£m, Cal£forn£a - COUNCIL MINUTES - IO.Y 18, 1993 - 5:00 P.M. homes on the site. At this time, larger homes are not selling. Working from the elevations posted on the Chan~er wall, he explained instead of approximately 3,000 square foot houses, he is submitting new plans to Building for plan check. They are unique and will be the subject of an article in the Orange County Register. The houses are now designed to edify what was original early downtown architectural instead of new modern stucco houses. They have 2,000 square foot floor plans designed for first or second time homebuyers. There will be an additional 2,000 square feet upstairs (bonus room). Whoever purchases the homes can later expand the house so they will never have to move. He confirmed there are still three houses, the footprint of the houses has changed and instead of $375,000, they are now designed to sell for under $250,000. MOTION: Council Member Pickler moved to approve the requested extension of time retroactive to June 4, 1992 to expire June 4, 1994 for Variance No. 4126. Council Member Feldhaus was absent. MOTION CARRIED. C1. COUNCIL COMMENTS: 161: MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION: City Clerk Sohl. The Council will be adjourning to 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 25, 1993 for a joint meeting with the Community Redevelopment Commission. She asked if there are any questions the Council would like to see as part of the agenda for the joint hearing. Mayor Daly. He would like to discuss Anaheim Plaza issues and the post offices both downtown and Loara as well as the status on the Brookhurst and South Anaheim Boulevard Redevelopment Study areas. Council Member Hunter. He noted on the agenda this evening there was an item regarding people doing improvements to their commercial buildings in the Redevelopment area. He would like more information on that. He notes a lot of work is being done to the Kraemer Building which is now entirely empty. He believes there is an opportunity to get 5% loans and that should be publicized. Mayor Daly. It is a business relocation incentive. It summarizes what they have done for some of the restaurants and some of the other businesses in the downtown area. ADJOURNMENT: By General Consent the Council meeting was adjourned to Tuesday, May 25, 1993 at ~:0O p.m. for a joint meeting with the Community Redevelopment Commission. (7:20 p.m.) LEONORA N. SOHL, CITY CLERK 345